Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 12:35:15 +0100 From: "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> To: "Terry Lambert" <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Why dual boot? Message-ID: <040601c1a726$b1195db0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> References: <3C4FBE5C.2AE8C65@mindspring.com> <20020123114658.A514@lpt.ens.fr> <20020123223104.SM01952@there> <3C4FBE5C.2AE8C65@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20020124213809.00e6e5d0@localhost> <20020125131659.GB7374@hades.hell.gr> <3C51CD33.4E69B204@mindspring.com> <001b01c1a635$636a4170$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <3C5270E4.BF21F79B@mindspring.com> <011b01c1a659$fb98a670$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <3C52AB34.B8896C8D@mindspring.com> <018c01c1a675$f3dcc1c0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <3C534259.A20067B2@mindspring.com> <02ba01c1a6ec$62983740$0a00000a@atkielski.com> òÿÿÿ <3C539BC5.C1543E5D@mindspring.com> <038b01c1a70e$fcb0f200$0a00000a@atkielski.com> ¿Àå¿¿ ±( Èð `ç¿¿ ³ð 0À øå¿¿ æ¿¿Ìæ¿¿¾ (tæ¿¿¿ð8ç¿¿u (¨® (àÑ (Dç¿¿á ( Ò ( Ó aÒ ( ç¿¿ àÑ (- üæ¿¿6Ò (¨® (àÑ ( <3C53DFEB.C9F6E25A@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry writes: > That's the definition of "anecdotally". I know. > It's repeated here for people who, unlike > you, don't own Merriam Webster's dictionary, > and have been taken in by your attempt to > redefine the word "empirically". How does defining a completely different word prove anything about my use of the word "empirically"? I used empirically from the beginning, and you attempted to equate it with anecdotally, even though the two words are quite different. If anything, providing a definition for the latter term only emphasizes this fact. > If you honestly mean "empirically", then > you won't mind giving everyone sufficient > information so as to be able to duplicate > your observations. Since empirical knowledge is based on experience (or observations, but experience is what I intended in my use of the word), they'd have to duplicate my experience, and obviously that is not possible. > > My own experience supports my assertions. > > Not empirically, it doesn't ... Empirically means "based on experience." > Wrong. See above. > Empirical: capable of being verified or disproved by > observation or experiment. Why do you cite only the third definition on page 379, instead of the first two? 1: originating in or based on observation or EXPERIENCE ... 2: relying on EXPERIENCE or observation ALONE often without due regard for system and theory ... (C) 1993 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. [Emphasis added] > All empirical evidence is, by definition, verifiable. Nothing in the definition you lifted from the dictionary says anything about verification. Neither do the parts of the definition that you left out. I get the overwhelming impression that you were not exactly sure what "empirical" meant before you encountered in in my post, because (1) you equated it with anecdotally, which was incorrect; then (2) you looked it up to find out what it really meant; then (3) you tried to quote a part of the definition that you thought might enable you to salvage your mistaken first impression of its meaning, without success. I can always tell when someone has had to look up a word. > Please contact: No. You may post your evidence here, if you wish, but I'm not going to contact anyone or look anything up for you. > Feel free to verify my assertions by contacting the > companies noted above, all of whom ship FreeBSD based > products, the "golden master" for which *sure as hell* > is not the CDROM new users can download off the net. No. Present your evidence here, or we shall do without. I will not do your work for you. I really don't understand why this is all such an issue for you, but then again, the workings of the standard angry young male's mind have always been somewhat of a mystery to me. In any case, it's always fun to press people to objectively justify purely subjective opinions and see how long it takes them to admit that they really _are_ subjective opinions, and not objectively verifiable realities. Angry young males never admit it, of course--they just fight and fight and fight, because fighting is what really interests them. My opinion is that dual-boot configurations are not worth the effort they require to set up. Your opinion differs from mine. Neither of us can prove our opinions to be objectively valid and correct. Therefore the Herculean effort you are expending to give the impression that you can provide such proof is wasted. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?040601c1a726$b1195db0$0a00000a>